Skip to content

Whether or not extra::time functions are monotonic should be documented #10339

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
mstewartgallus opened this issue Nov 7, 2013 · 3 comments
Closed

Comments

@mstewartgallus
Copy link
Contributor

It should be documented whether or not extra::time functions can go backwards in time. One reasonable way for that to happen for some functions might be that the user changes the time settings.

@nham
Copy link
Contributor

nham commented Aug 18, 2014

Visiting for triage. Since extra::time (now libtime) will eventually be replaced by something (rust-chrono?) (cf #14657), should this be closed and filed under the replacement (provided it persists there)?

@gsingh93
Copy link
Contributor

I believe these time functions are gone now. This should probably be closed.

@steveklabnik
Copy link
Member

Yup!

Jarcho pushed a commit to Jarcho/rust that referenced this issue Feb 26, 2023
uninlined_format_args: do not inline argument with generic parameters

Fix rust-lang#10339

---

changelog: FP: [`uninlined_format_args`]: No longer lints for arguments with generic parameters
[rust-lang#10343](rust-lang/rust-clippy#10343)
<!-- changelog_checked -->
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants